[diana_eva]

MrAce, on 2015-June-07, 15:29, said:

I do not understand this comment. Were they not moderated? I thought you and Barmar and Ben moderates every forums.
What I suggest is B/N forum to be restricted.

Yes this. I didn't word it properly.

[jjbrr]

Can we just be clear and admit that BBF is totally and unequivocally opposed to banning posters? It would save some smart people a lot of time if we just get to the root of the problem.

[diana_eva]

jjbrr, on 2015-June-07, 15:48, said:

Can we just be clear and admit that BBF is totally and unequivocally opposed to banning posters? It would save some smart people a lot of time if we just get to the root of the problem.

I'm opposed to banning posters for stupidity.

[jjbrr]

So spamming aside, you'd agree that there is literally nothing a poster can say that warrants a ban. If you disagree, can you suggest an example? I have some examples in mind that you should be careful about.

[diana_eva]

jjbrr, on 2015-June-07, 15:55, said:

So spamming aside, you'd agree that there is literally nothing a poster can say that warrants a ban. If you disagree, can you suggest an example? I have some examples in mind that you should be careful about.

I'm very lenient and I admit it openly. If you don't see why people accused of trolling take offence and react badly, I'm sorry.

I agree that we (mods) should protect the N/B Forums. We haven't done so before because it was not necessary. That has nothing to do with frequent accusations of trolling aimed at people who are morons, but not trolls.

[mikeh]

diana_eva, on 2015-June-07, 16:09, said:

I'm very lenient and I admit it openly. If you don't see why people accused of trolling take offence and react badly, I'm sorry.

I agree that we (mods) should protect the N/B Forums. We haven't done so before because it was not necessary. That has nothing to do with frequent accusations of trolling aimed at people who are morons, but not trolls.

I possess no monopoly on understanding the mindset of this guy, and confess that I 'see' trolling more often than most. I really have a tough time seeing this guy as merely stupid, tho. Do you agree that there is a difference?

Do you agree that in principle trolling is banishable, as it is on most blogs/website, as far as I know (which isn't that far, in honesty)?

[MrAce]

diana_eva, on 2015-June-07, 16:09, said:

I'm very lenient and I admit it openly. If you don't see why people accused of trolling take offence and react badly, I'm sorry.

I agree that we (mods) should protect the N/B Forums. We haven't done so before because it was not necessary. That has nothing to do with frequent accusations of trolling aimed at people who are morons, but not trolls.

Then I will have to ask you the same that I asked to Nige1, since you also conveniently ignoring the words such as "palookas" "fake experts" by him to just start flame, WAY BEFORE he was called a troll! And trying to sell us that he is acting like this because he took offence at being called a "troll" as if you calling him stupid is anything less offensive.

And I am telling you, ONLY a troll would stick around a forum, where the 90 % of members think he is either STUPID or TROLL. I personally think he is BOTH.... I am just saying.

[manudude03]

It's not like these posts just started recently. I did a google search for PhilG007 and came up with a couple of matches from 2013:

http://www.bridgebas...-2/page__st__40
http://www.bridgebas...t-does-it-show/

It does seem his antics have gotten worse lately.

[barmar]

MrAce, on 2015-June-07, 15:29, said:

I do not understand this comment. Were they not moderated? I thought you and Barmar and Ben moderates every forums.
What I suggest is B/N forum to be restricted.

I think they were referring to proactive moderation. We don't monitor everything that's posted (I don't even read the N/B, I/A, or Expert forums). Our moderation is mostly reactive, in response to reports from forum members.

[nige1]

daveharty, on 2013-October-27, 09:52, said:

I've got to start reading the forums more often again...I almost missed this thread altogether. Priceless.

That's the last quote in the 1st thread cited by manudude03. PhilG003 has unpopular views but he stirs up excitement and interest
Furthermore, unless PhilG003 really was trolling when he challenged MrAce, we'll soon be thrilled by a fascinating bridge-match

[diana_eva]

mikeh, on 2015-June-07, 16:37, said:

I possess no monopoly on understanding the mindset of this guy, and confess that I 'see' trolling more often than most. I really have a tough time seeing this guy as merely stupid, tho. Do you agree that there is a difference?

Do you agree that in principle trolling is banishable, as it is on most blogs/website, as far as I know (which isn't that far, in honesty)?

Yes I agree trolling is a bannable offense, and we banned a number of trolls where we had ways to establish that their motives were indeed to mess up with the community. This was done silently and quickly, with no bells and whistles, so it's likely most posters wouldn't even have noticed the said trolls.


I'm not claiming he flipped only because you or others called him a troll. He's had enough of chances from the posters and from mods too - there was a good amount of back and forth from me and barry where we tried to explain that he's picking on the wrong people and he'd better make an effort to read what was said before fighting back. If someone is incapable of fitting in, so be it.

However, when he starts a new thread and the first reply is "troll" that hardly gives him any chance to clean up his act. I'd like that each new clean thread be treated as, well, a new clean thread, without assuming malicious reasons behind it.

This discussion is important to me because it defines the limitation of how much is enough. There are a lot more bad players out there than there are good players. Those bad players will be in and out the forums from time to time. They will be posting rubbish and they will try to defend it more or less aggressively or in an authoritative tone, because that's what many people do. When they see others don't agree they yell louder, rather than thinking of why the others don't agree with them. This is human nature, not naturally born trolls, and it will happen again.

[mikeh]

diana_eva, on 2015-June-07, 23:28, said:

Yes I agree trolling is a bannable offense, and we banned a number of trolls where we had ways to establish that their motives were indeed to mess up with the community. This was done silently and quickly, with no bells and whistles, so it's likely most posters wouldn't even have noticed the said trolls.


I'm not claiming he flipped only because you or others called him a troll. He's had enough of chances from the posters and from mods too - there was a good amount of back and forth from me and barry where we tried to explain that he's picking on the wrong people and he'd better make an effort to read what was said before fighting back. If someone is incapable of fitting in, so be it.

However, when he starts a new thread and the first reply is "troll" that hardly gives him any chance to clean up his act. I'd like that each new clean thread be treated as, well, a new clean thread, without assuming malicious reasons behind it.

This discussion is important to me because it defines the limitation of how much is enough. There are a lot more bad players out there than there are good players. Those bad players will be in and out the forums from time to time. They will be posting rubbish and they will try to defend it more or less aggressively or in an authoritative tone, because that's what many people do. When they see others don't agree they yell louder, rather than thinking of why the others don't agree with them. This is human nature, not naturally born trolls, and it will happen again.

You may well be right, although I see no actual evidence as yet. If he were merely a bad player, spouting nonsense in the belief that it was good advice, why does he start threads about the LOTT or the mini-NT, as he did, purporting to want a discussion on the merits, and then write posts dismissing all but his own idea? I mean, if it walks like a troll, quacks like a troll, and looks like a troll, well, he is either a troll or a very unlucky man.

Tell you what: let's give him a chance. If he is the least bit genuine, then surely the criticisms that have been made should get him worried that he is being unfairly characterized, and he ca undo all of that by making a post or two demonstrating that he is trying to be a contributor to the forum, reading and trying to understand what others write.

I doubt that he will even try. He seems to have gone silent for a day or two, which I attribute to the fact that some of us are onto him, and he isn't getting the same sick jollies he was getting when he was fooling everyone. I may be wrong. Indeed, I hope I am entirely wrong about him. I don't have any problem with posters who aren't very good, so long as they are sincere. All of us had to learn sometime, and somewhere. This is a great place for inexperienced players to learn, if they want to learn.

So: PhilG007, here's your chance to get me off your case, and maybe others as well. Are you the type of person who can admit to error?

[diana_eva]

mikeh, on 2015-June-07, 23:51, said:

why does he start threads about the LOTT or the mini-NT, as he did, purporting to want a discussion on the merits, and then write posts dismissing all but his own idea?

I believe that was his attempt to prove he isn't a troll, actually.

[diana_eva]

MrAce, on 2015-June-07, 12:24, said:

Tbh, I would have no problem what so ever, if you guys decided that N/B forum is open to ONLY N/B players and MODS and players with stars. I would not be offended despite the fact that I made a living and still do from teaching. At least I would be comfortable knowing that palookas are not messing with N/B. It is not even a very populated forum. Mostly we have a novice or beginner asking a question now and then, and a pile of people answering just to make them even more confused. You-Ben-Barmar are more than capable of replying their questions along with the players with stars. There is not huge amount of N/B players coming everyday asking questions. Please protect them.

This is done now. Barmar created a way to restrict specific posters from posting in the N/B Forums. If you or anyone else notices someone consistently posting bad/harmful advice in the N/B please report the posts and we'll consider limiting that person's posting rights.

N/B is still open to anyone to post. Hopefully we won't need to use this restriction in the future, but if necessary it's possible to do that from now on.

[MrAce]

diana_eva, on 2015-June-08, 00:31, said:

This is done now. Barmar created a way to restrict specific posters from posting in the N/B Forums. If you or anyone else notices someone consistently posting bad/harmful advice in the N/B please report the posts and we'll consider limiting that person's posting rights.

N/B is still open to anyone to post. Hopefully we won't need to use this restriction in the future, but if necessary it's possible to do that from now on.

Thank you and Barmar very much! That's all I was asking.

[kenberg]

It looks like a resolution. Great!!!

Prompted by this discussion I took my first ever look at the B/N forum. I was surprised. It appears that a B/N asks a question and then the replies are pretty much all from advanced players. I think this is good, I just wan't expecting it.

And I was wondering if I fit in. I will give an example.

A question was asked about the bid of 2NT after an opening 1 level bid and two passes. Ths evolved into a discussion of ranges for various actions involving NT in the balancing position.

Here was one reply

Quote

Mike Lawrence suggests that a balancing 1NT should start at 12 HCP and have a variable upper limit depending on the suit of the opening bid. So over 1♣ it's 12-14 and over 1♠ it's 12-16. This means that doubling and then bidding 1NT has a variable lower limit, 15 over a club, 17 over a spade. The upper limit would be 18 in all cases, I think. So 2NT logically is 19-20, and doubling and then bidding 2NT is 21-22. You need the narrow ranges when bidding 2NT, so you need the immediate 2NT bid to be natural, or your ladder only reaches 20 points. I don't know what the odds are that fourth seat will have more than 20 points when LHO opens at the one level, but presumably they're high enough that extending your ladder to some point above 20 is worth doing.

I started a reply to this reply, as follows:

Quote

Since I agree with this approach for the balancing NT I want to add a word. You say that doubling 1S and then bidding 1NT shows a 17 count. More likely (unless the auction comes back to you as 1SXX) it shows an insufficient bid. I mention this not to catch you out but rather to explain why I like the upper limit of 16 on the balance of 1S: If you think, or hope, that 1NT may be playable then now is the time to bid it. Without a doubt the large range leads to ambiguity, but it's a price I pay.

But I didn't post it. Is this really something for B/N players? You may agree with my thoughts on the balance (hey, I've got Mike Lawrence in my corner) or you may not, that's not my question. I am asking whether this is the sort of discussion we need in the B/N forum.

I am neither an expert nor an idiot and I definitely am not a troll, and neither is the poster I am quoting, but this all seems far afield for B/N. Your thoughts?

And I have a suggestion. On the I/A forum mikeh has a pinned posting called "a primer on reverse bidding" I find it useful. That's not the same as saying I agree with every detail in it. But many players on bbo and elsewhere have given very little thought to how to develop an auction after a reverse.It's extremely useful to be able to say "I'm fine with playing it the way mikeh describes in his pinned note". If I play regularly with someone, we can discuss tweaks. Or not. Maybe there could be a few pinned posts of a similar nature suitable for B/N players. It is not necessary that the recommendations have unanimous support, choices have to be made, but they should be standard and sensible.

[StevenG]

kenberg, on 2015-June-08, 06:40, said:

Is this really something for B/N players? You may agree with my thoughts on the balance (hey, I've got Mike Lawrence in my corner) or you may not, that's not my question. I am asking whether this is the sort of discussion we need in the B/N forum.

I am neither an expert nor an idiot and I definitely am not a troll, and neither is the poster I am quoting, but this all seems far afield for B/N. Your thoughts?

I suspect a significant number of posters (not me, though) check out all new forum content and are oblivious to whether they are posting in the N/B or the Expert forum.

[mikeh]

diana_eva, on 2015-June-08, 00:04, said:

I believe that was his attempt to prove he isn't a troll, actually.

It's ironic that I thought that those two threads were the definitive proof this he was! He started threads that read, initially, as if he was trying to be a genuine contributor, but at an early opportunity began writing utterly trolling comments, rubbishing the opinions that he had purported to solicit.

It goes to show that beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, I suppose

Anyway, unless and until he re-emerges, I have no more to say on the topic, and if he does re-emerge, I try truly hope you prove to be correct and me wrong.

[diana_eva]

mikeh, on 2015-June-08, 08:15, said:

It's ironic that I thought that those two threads were the definitive proof this he was! He started threads that read, initially, as if he was trying to be a genuine contributor, but at an early opportunity began writing utterly trolling comments, rubbishing the opinions that he had purported to solicit.

It goes to show that beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, I suppose

Anyway, unless and until he re-emerges, I have no more to say on the topic, and if he does re-emerge, I try truly hope you prove to be correct and me wrong.

Not trying to beat a dead horse, but in the end this has to be said.

Not everyone who joins the Forums does so with the intention to learn. There will be people thinking the forums are a place to state opinions on equal level and then defend their opinions on equal level and then refuse to accept the learner position. The reasonable ones will of course be open to dialogue and learn from these exchanges. But some will not be prepared right from the start to assume a humble position in an argument, and be downright offended if someone gives them a lecture on how much they have to learn. They didn't come to learn, they came to share and state opinions. Not sure how to word the difference accurately, but it's a state of mind.

Some people readily admit that they are never too old to learn. Others don't do that and think they have every right to speak up after say 30 years of experience. The Forums have the power to switch some of the "i've come here to talk" camp to "I guess I still have some things to learn" camp, but let's not just assume everyone is prepared to be on the humble side

[barmar]

diana_eva, on 2015-June-08, 12:01, said:

Not everyone who joins the Forums does so with the intention to learn. There will be people thinking the forums are a place to state opinions on equal level and then defend their opinions on equal level and then refuse to accept the learner position. The reasonable ones will of course be open to dialogue and learn from these exchanges. But some will not be prepared right from the start to assume a humble position in an argument, and be downright offended if someone gives them a lecture on how much they have to learn. They didn't come to learn, they came to share and state opinions. Not sure how to word the difference accurately, but it's a state of mind.

Which is somewhat OK, but there are right and wrong places for this. If you think you're an expert and want to argue your opinions with other experts, the Expert forum is an appropriate place. They're all big boys there, they can deal with it. The Novice/Beginner forum is not a good place, because its purpose is education of beginners, and "discussions" like this will be more confusing than helpful.

We've gotten complaints in both cases, but they were very different. When someone was repeatedly posting idiotic ideas in the Expert forum, complaints didn't usually appear until they devolved into derogatory name-calling, and the complaints were about the abusive language. But in the N/B forum, we've received numerous complaints about the offbeat ideas themselves, because it seemed like the poster was intentionally trying to confuse the newbies with his strange ideas.